CVE-2026-47415: praisonai-platform Issue Endpoints Accept Any Issue_id Vulnerability

{
  "schema_version" : "1.4.0",
  "id" : "GHSA-xwq8-frcg-77q8",
  "modified" : "2026-06-01T14:24:12Z",
  "published" : "2026-06-01T14:24:12Z",
  "aliases" : [ "CVE-2026-47415" ],
  "summary" : "praisonai-platform: Issue endpoints accept any issue_id without workspace ownership check, cross-workspace read/update/delete IDOR",
  "details" : "## Summary\n\n**Type:** Insecure Direct Object Reference. The issue CRUD endpoints (`GET / PATCH / DELETE /workspaces/{workspace_id}/issues/{issue_id}`) gate access on `require_workspace_member(workspace_id)` only, then resolve `issue_id` through `IssueService.get(issue_id)` which is a primary-key lookup with no workspace constraint. A user who is a member of any workspace `W1` can read, modify, or delete issues that belong to a different workspace `W2`.\n**File:** `src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/services/issue_service.py`, lines 72-156; route handlers at `src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/issues.py`, lines 82-137.\n**Root cause:** the route extracts `workspace_id` from the URL path, uses it solely for the membership gate, then calls `IssueService.get(issue_id)` / `IssueService.update(issue_id, ...)` / `IssueService.delete(issue_id)` without re-checking which workspace the issue actually belongs to. `IssueService.get` runs a single-key lookup; `update` and `delete` call `self.get(issue_id)` first and then mutate the returned row, inheriting the same gap. The `MemberService` in this same codebase uses a composite `(workspace_id, user_id)` key, proving the author knows the safe pattern; it was simply not applied to the issue, agent, project, comment, or label services.\n\n## Affected Code\n\n**File 1:** `src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/services/issue_service.py`, lines 72-75 and 97-156.\n\n```python\nclass IssueService:\n    ...\n\n    async def get(self, issue_id: str) -> Optional[Issue]:\n        \"\"\"Get issue by ID.\"\"\"\n        return await self._session.get(Issue, issue_id)             # <-- BUG: no workspace_id predicate\n\n    async def update(\n        self,\n        issue_id: str,\n        title: Optional[str] = None,\n        ...\n    ) -> Optional[Issue]:\n        issue = await self.get(issue_id)                            # <-- inherits the same gap\n        if issue is None:\n            return None\n        ...\n        return issue\n\n    async def delete(self, issue_id: str) -> bool:\n        issue = await self.get(issue_id)                            # <-- inherits the same gap\n        if issue is None:\n            return False\n        await self._session.delete(issue)\n        await self._session.flush()\n        return True\n```\n\n**File 2:** `src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/api/routes/issues.py`, lines 82-137.\n\n```python\n@router.get(\"/{issue_id}\", response_model=IssueResponse)\nasync def get_issue(\n    workspace_id: str,\n    issue_id: str,\n    user: AuthIdentity = Depends(require_workspace_member),         # only checks membership in workspace_id\n    session: AsyncSession = Depends(get_db),\n):\n    svc = IssueService(session)\n    issue = await svc.get(issue_id)                                 # <-- workspace_id never threaded through\n    if issue is None:\n        raise HTTPException(status_code=404, detail=\"Issue not found\")\n    return IssueResponse.model_validate(issue)\n\n\n@router.patch(\"/{issue_id}\", response_model=IssueResponse)\nasync def update_issue(\n    workspace_id: str,\n    issue_id: str,\n    body: IssueUpdate,\n    user: AuthIdentity = Depends(require_workspace_member),\n    session: AsyncSession = Depends(get_db),\n):\n    svc = IssueService(session)\n    issue = await svc.update(                                       # <-- writes to any issue in the DB\n        issue_id, title=body.title, description=body.description,\n        status=body.status, priority=body.priority,\n        assignee_type=body.assignee_type, assignee_id=body.assignee_id,\n        project_id=body.project_id,\n    )\n    ...\n```\n\n`delete_issue` (lines 127-137) repeats the pattern.\n\n**Why it's wrong:** `workspace_id` from the route is used solely as a membership predicate (\"are you in some workspace W?\"), never as a resource-ownership predicate (\"is the issue you are addressing actually inside W?\"). The standard FastAPI/SQLAlchemy fix is to make the resource-lookup query include the workspace constraint and treat absence as 404, so a foreign-workspace issue is indistinguishable from a non-existent one. The `update_issue` handler additionally allows the attacker to overwrite `project_id`, which can re-assign the foreign issue to an unrelated project the attacker also does not own — escalating the scope of the write primitive.\n\n## Exploit Chain\n\n1. Attacker registers a workspace `W_attacker` (where they are a member) and harvests a target issue UUID `I_T` from any side channel: the activity feed (`activity.py:log` records `issue_id=...`), comment threads, error messages, exported issue dumps, issue mentions in agent prompts, or operator screenshots. Issue IDs are uuid4 strings but they are not secret. State: attacker holds `I_T`.\n2. Attacker authenticates and POSTs `Authorization: Bearer <attacker_jwt>` to `GET /workspaces/W_attacker/issues/I_T`. `require_workspace_member(W_attacker, attacker)` passes (attacker is a member of `W_attacker`). State: control flow enters `get_issue` with `workspace_id=W_attacker, issue_id=I_T`.\n3. `IssueService.get(I_T)` runs `session.get(Issue, \"I_T\")`, which is `SELECT * FROM issues WHERE id = 'I_T' LIMIT 1` with no `workspace_id = 'W_attacker'` filter. The row is returned in full — including `title`, `description` (often confidential bug-report content, customer PII, embedded credentials, or internal roadmap data), `status`, `priority`, `assignee_id`, `created_by`, and `project_id`. State: response body is the JSON-serialised foreign issue.\n4. Attacker repeats with `PATCH /workspaces/W_attacker/issues/I_T` and a body of `{\"description\": \"<reset>\", \"status\": \"closed\", \"project_id\": \"<arbitrary>\"}`. `update_issue` calls `svc.update(I_T, ...)` which loads the target row and mutates the listed fields. State: the foreign workspace's issue is silently re-described, re-statused, and re-projected.\n5. Attacker calls `DELETE /workspaces/W_attacker/issues/I_T` to destroy the target issue. `IssueService.delete` loads the row and calls `session.delete()`. State: target issue is gone from the foreign workspace.\n6. Final state: any attacker with one workspace-member token can enumerate, exfiltrate, rewrite, and delete every issue in the multi-tenant deployment given the issue UUIDs (which leak through the side channels above). The `act_svc.log(workspace_id, \"issue.updated\", \"issue\", issue.id, ...)` call at line 118 records the event under `W_attacker` rather than `W_target`, so the foreign workspace's audit trail does not record the tampering — making detection harder.\n\n## Security Impact\n\n**Severity:** sec-high. CVSS 8.1: network attack, low complexity, low privileges (any workspace member), no user interaction, scope unchanged, high confidentiality (full issue body including any embedded secrets), high integrity (arbitrary writes including project re-assignment), low availability (DELETE wipes target issues).\n**Attacker capability:** with one workspace-member token plus a harvested issue UUID, an attacker reads the target issue's `title`, `description`, `status`, `priority`, `assignee_id`, and `project_id`; rewrites any of those fields (silent edit, false closure, malicious re-assignment); re-projects the issue to an unrelated project to confuse triagers; or deletes the issue altogether to destroy evidence of customer reports.\n**Preconditions:** `praisonai-platform` is deployed multi-tenant; the attacker has any membership token; the target issue's UUID is known or guessable (UUIDs leak through activity feeds, comment threads, error messages, exported dumps, and operator screenshots).\n**Differential:** source-inspection-verified end-to-end. The asymmetry between `IssueService.get(issue_id)` (no workspace check) and `MemberService.get(workspace_id, user_id)` (composite key check) in the same codebase confirms the pattern. With the suggested fix below applied, `IssueService.get(workspace_id, issue_id)` returns `None` for foreign-workspace issues, the route handler returns 404, and the foreign data is indistinguishable from a missing record.\n\n## Suggested Fix\n\nMake every single-row resource lookup take the workspace predicate; treat foreign-workspace rows as 404.\n\n```diff\n--- a/src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/services/issue_service.py\n+++ b/src/praisonai-platform/praisonai_platform/services/issue_service.py\n@@ -69,9 +69,12 @@ class IssueService:\n         await self._session.flush()\n         return issue\n\n-    async def get(self, issue_id: str) -> Optional[Issue]:\n-        \"\"\"Get issue by ID.\"\"\"\n-        return await self._session.get(Issue, issue_id)\n+    async def get(self, workspace_id: str, issue_id: str) -> Optional[Issue]:\n+        \"\"\"Get issue by ID, scoped to a workspace.\"\"\"\n+        stmt = select(Issue).where(\n+            Issue.id == issue_id, Issue.workspace_id == workspace_id\n+        )\n+        return (await self._session.execute(stmt)).scalar_one_or_none()\n\n     async def update(\n         self,\n+        workspace_id: str,\n         issue_id: str,\n         ...\n     ) -> Optional[Issue]:\n-        issue = await self.get(issue_id)\n+        issue = await self.get(workspace_id, issue_id)\n         ...\n\n-    async def delete(self, issue_id: str) -> bool:\n+    async def delete(self, workspace_id: str, issue_id: str) -> bool:\n-        issue = await self.get(issue_id)\n+        issue = await self.get(workspace_id, issue_id)\n```\n\nUpdate the route handlers in `routes/issues.py` to thread `workspace_id` through. The same pattern (single-key resource lookup gated only by workspace-member check) exists in `AgentService`, `ProjectService`, `CommentService`, and `LabelService`; each is a separate exploitable IDOR and should be filed as its own advisory so each gets a CVE.",
  "severity" : [ {
    "type" : "CVSS_V3",
    "score" : "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L"
  } ],
  "affected" : [ {
    "package" : {
      "ecosystem" : "PyPI",
      "name" : "praisonai-platform"
    },
    "ranges" : [ {
      "type" : "ECOSYSTEM",
      "events" : [ {
        "introduced" : "0"
      }, {
        "fixed" : "0.1.4"
      } ]
    } ]
  } ],
  "references" : [ {
    "type" : "WEB",
    "url" : "https://github.com/MervinPraison/PraisonAI/security/advisories/GHSA-xwq8-frcg-77q8"
  }, {
    "type" : "PACKAGE",
    "url" : "https://github.com/MervinPraison/PraisonAI"
  } ],
  "database_specific" : {
    "cwe_ids" : [ "CWE-639" ],
    "severity" : "HIGH",
    "github_reviewed" : true,
    "github_reviewed_at" : "2026-06-01T14:24:12Z",
    "nvd_published_at" : null
  }
}